FAROOQ etc vs STATE etc
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a criminal miscellaneous application seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of FIR No. 178 of 2018 registered at Police Station Seetpur, District Muzaffargarh, for offences under Sections 452, 354, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-A(z), 337-F(v), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question involves determining whether the petitioners have made out a case for pre-arrest bail in view of general imputations, debatable injury descriptions, and the existence of a cross-version. The court held that the application should be dismissed as withdrawn for certain petitioners, while pre-arrest bail is confirmed for the remaining petitioners either due to lack of specific roles, a potentially fabricated injury, or the existence of a cross-version rendering their culpability a matter of further inquiry. The key principle laid down is that general attribution without specific roles, doubtful medical evidence, and a counter-version warrant the confirmation of pre-arrest bail pending trial.
- Can pre-arrest bail be granted when accused persons are nominated in the FIR without any specific role attributed to them?
- Does the presence of a cross-version and simple injuries justify confirming pre-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry?
- What is the legal effect of a medical board finding an injury to be potentially fabricated when assessing a pre-arrest bail petition?
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
The Petitioners are booked in case FIR No, 178/2018 dated 318-2018 regist ered at Police Station Seetpur , District Muzaf fargarh, for offerees under Sections 452/ 354/ 337-A(i)/ 337-A(ii)/ 3374,(2)/ 337-F(v)/148/149 PPC.
Through this application they seek pre-arrest bail in the said case.
2. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the Petitioners states that he wants to withdraw this application to the extent of Petitioners No, 7, 8 & 9, namely , Nawab alias Pervaiz, Ijaz and Altaf. As such, this application is dismissed qua them.
3. Briefly , the prosecution case is that on 29-8-2018 the Petitioners and their co-accused while armed with different weapons formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of its common object trespassed into the Complainant's house and attacked the inmates. As a result, 10 persons were injured.
4. I have heard the learned counsel and perused the record. It is observed that although Petitioners No, 10 & 11 (Akram and Abdul Sattar) are nominated in the FIR, no specific role is attributed to them. On the other hand, Petitioner No, 4 (Nawaz,) is accused of having inflicted a hatchet blow to Mushtaq Ahmad on his head. According to the District Standing Medical Board the said injury had a freely mobile scar and tapering ends which indicates that it is fabricated. In the circumstances, possibility cannot be ruled out that the Complainant has spread a wide net to falsely implicate these three Petitioners in this case.
5. So far as Petitioners No, 1,2,3,5 & 6 ( Farooq, Punnu, Bilal, Fayyaz and Muhammad Afzal) ate concerned, the injuries attributed to them are simple in nature. There is a cross-version in the field from other side which alleges that the complainant party had committed aggression. As such, the question as to whether the said Petitioners trespassed into the Complainant's house requires further inquiry . The learned trial Court shall answer it after recording evidence at the trial. Accordingly , this application is allowed to the extent of Petitioners No, 1 to 6, 10 &
11. Ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to them is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in sum Of Rs, 200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.